What: are they trying to force people to read the front page? That's like RTFA, or something.
In what way is he using the words "tyranny" or "cheat" in a non-hating way?
Well, there's always the title, itself: "The Tyranny of Cliches". Juxtaposing a violent word like 'tyranny' with 'cliche', should, in a thoughtful reader, invite some question as to what he's on about. "How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas" informs us that the cliches are rhetorical roadblocks to discourse:
Goldberg's revelations are meant not to compile an interesting batch of factoids to drop at dinner parties, but to illustrate his thesis: the left employs clichés in order to cloak its ruthless, ruinous ideological aims in the language of easy-listening rhetoric, all the while denying that it is promoting a program attempting to establish a technocratic all-encompassing state in the name of the pragmatism of Progressivism: "The greater good"; "Social justice"; "Violence never solves anything"; "Power corrupts."
Your attempt to label Goldberg "hate speech", itself, is an example of the sort of cliche Goldberg exposes.
Your purpose appears to be to silence, not engage in legitimate debate.
He is most certainly not encouraging power sharing, socio-economic mobility, or understanding or communication with those from different walks of life or philosophical backgrounds.
Actually, his book The Tyranny of Clichés: How Liberals Cheat in the War of Ideas is a good overview of precisely how your ilk is pretty much the antithesis of communication.
My goal remains the same. I want you to actually learn.
Oh, believe me: you've done a heck of a job, Gruber.
But all the memetic warfare is triggering fatigue, as well. The Trayvon Martin effort to start a race war fizzled. I don't think Ferguson is going to deliver the desired French Revolution, either.
While these old Gustav LeBon plays retain some power, the Left both lacks the media lock necessary to do more than make a large smell, and the imagination to do anything different.